Started By
Message
re: Auburn May Add National Championships
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:53 pm to Ross
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:53 pm to Ross
No, we will not.
LINK
LINK
quote:
Twenty-seven years ago, an outstanding Tiger team was worthy of a title and denied by an egregious popularity contest at the ballot box. In the spirit of Cold Case, the TNT show that I can't believe got taken off the air, let's dig back into the misdeeds of college football's past and see why 1983 Auburn should have been honored with a #1 ranking.
1
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:55 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
That FSU team apparently gave Miami all they wanted and more as well. Miami eeked out a one point win.
It's pretty easy to see the most deserving team got shite all over in 1983.
It's pretty easy to see the most deserving team got shite all over in 1983.
This post was edited on 2/1/14 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:58 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
And more from sbnation. Lots of people are well aware AU was the true national champion of 1983.
LINK
FTR, I am opposed to the 1993 claim. FSU would likely have smoked us in the bowl game that year. I do support 2004 along with 1913 and 1983 though.
LINK
quote:
1983
And here's the big one.
The Tigers have a case for claiming 1983.
Even though Miami won the AP, FWAA, UPI, and USA Today and Nebraska won more total selectors than Auburn did, all three teams finished with one loss. Multiple outlets considered Auburn the best.
Miami beat three teams ranked in the final AP poll; Auburn beat four. The Tigers had the better loss -- Auburn's was to a Texas team that came within a field goal of going unbeaten, and Texas' only loss was to a Georgia team that Auburn had beaten, while Miami fell to Florida by 25 points. And to stay on that, Auburn beat Florida.
The SRS formula ranks Auburn No. 1, Miami No. 4. Auburn played one of the toughest schedules in college football history. The Tigers ranked ahead of the Canes in the AP poll until the end of the season, when Miami beat No. 1 Nebraska in the Orange Bowl by one point (when Huskers coach Tom Osborne elected to go for two and the win despite needing only a tie to clinch the title) and somehow vaulted from No. 5 to No. 1.
Claiming 1983 wouldn't raise a fuss outside of Miami (Nebraska certainly doesn't claim it).
FTR, I am opposed to the 1993 claim. FSU would likely have smoked us in the bowl game that year. I do support 2004 along with 1913 and 1983 though.
This post was edited on 2/1/14 at 2:59 pm
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:08 pm to Bama Bird
quote:
1983 and 2004 have legitimate claims. None of the others do
I agree mostly. I don't think 1993 has a claim for the same reason that USC 2004 doesn't have a claim: NCAA probation.
But there are legit arguments in support of AU 1983 and 2004 as being the best teams, with reputable retroactive polls to support them (and one reputable poll in 1983 that was NOT retroactive).
But I disagree when you say ONLY 1983 and 2004. I also think AU 1913 is as legitimate a claim as a school can make for teams in that period of early football. Football historians already recognize that team as being ONE of the best of that early football time period. They were undefeated. They dominated their opponents. They have as good an argument to a mythical "championship" as any.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:10 pm to northalabamacracker
Nebraska lost by one point ON MIAMI'S HOME field to a one loss Miami.
Nebraska and Osborne were idiots, the extra point would have won the national title.
Auburn won Billingsley's computer poll because they played the toughest schedule by far.
Nebraska and Osborne were idiots, the extra point would have won the national title.
Auburn won Billingsley's computer poll because they played the toughest schedule by far.
This post was edited on 2/1/14 at 7:39 pm
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:13 pm to Alahunter
quote:
It'd be the same thing as Bama's 1941 claim, if Au claimed this. Exact. Same. Thing.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:20 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
I kind of respected Osborne for going for the win, but it did cost them the title and opened up this debate.
You've got four one loss teams, two of them lost at the end of the season so that leaves two of them: Miami and Auburn.
Auburn's resume is much, much more impressive than Miami's over the course of the year, and given the fact that Nebraska's resume was pretty weak as well, the fact that Miami's one win versus Nebraska put them above Auburn who had one of the toughest schedules ever played is bullshite.
You've got four one loss teams, two of them lost at the end of the season so that leaves two of them: Miami and Auburn.
Auburn's resume is much, much more impressive than Miami's over the course of the year, and given the fact that Nebraska's resume was pretty weak as well, the fact that Miami's one win versus Nebraska put them above Auburn who had one of the toughest schedules ever played is bullshite.
This post was edited on 2/1/14 at 3:20 pm
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:21 pm to SamGinn Cam
Go for it
Wish Arkansas would
Wish Arkansas would
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:23 pm to Ross
Nebraska isn't even in the conversation for the 1983 title IMO. They were 1-1 against ranked teams and lost the bowl game. No dice.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:23 pm to Ross
Figured you may like this...
LINK
Lindsey introduces the video she posted Saturday of her discovering Calton’s penchant for “War Damn Eagle” as opposed to the G-rated original version by writing “Uh oh!!! Disclaimer: We did NOT teach him to say this!!! He must have heard it at the games and on the Auburn videos he watches!!! Time to explain ‘bad words’!!!”
LINK
Lindsey introduces the video she posted Saturday of her discovering Calton’s penchant for “War Damn Eagle” as opposed to the G-rated original version by writing “Uh oh!!! Disclaimer: We did NOT teach him to say this!!! He must have heard it at the games and on the Auburn videos he watches!!! Time to explain ‘bad words’!!!”
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:24 pm to Alahunter
That is priceless. Somebody is raising that kid right.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:26 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
Nebraska being ranked above Auburn, while completely meaningless, is just as outrageous as Miami being ranked above Auburn.
Like you said, 1-1 versus ranked teams, the win being against #18 Penn State in the very first game of the year. They had several close games versus pretty average opposition. That team lived off of reputation.
Like you said, 1-1 versus ranked teams, the win being against #18 Penn State in the very first game of the year. They had several close games versus pretty average opposition. That team lived off of reputation.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:27 pm to Ross
quote:
That team lived off of reputation.
Yep. For sure. Which is also the main reason AP voters jumped Miami over AU. Just faulty logic and reasoning all the way around in 1983.
BTW, since I started posting here 6+ years ago I have pounded the table about AU in '83 and it is the reason for my username as well. My years of diligence is soon to bear fruit and my mission in life will be complete once the 1983 flag is raised and the claim is official.
This post was edited on 2/1/14 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:37 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
Posted on 2/1/14 at 4:05 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
You're disputing the AP rankings for '83.
How do you defend your stance? By repeatedly using AP rankings..
How do you defend your stance? By repeatedly using AP rankings..
quote:
They were 1-1 against ranked teams
quote:
victories against top 20 teams, 4 of them top ten.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 4:15 pm to bona fide
We don't have to use the AP rankings.
We could use teams played with a winning record. 9 of AU's 12 opponents had a winning record. Go look up Nebraska's...
Or bowl opponents.
Or opponent winning percentage.
Or whatever you want. Doesn't matter. AU wins the argument every time in every way in 1983. That is why AU was the 1983 national champion and it isn't really that close.
We could use teams played with a winning record. 9 of AU's 12 opponents had a winning record. Go look up Nebraska's...
Or bowl opponents.
Or opponent winning percentage.
Or whatever you want. Doesn't matter. AU wins the argument every time in every way in 1983. That is why AU was the 1983 national champion and it isn't really that close.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 4:19 pm to bona fide
The fact is Auburn does not have the respect or esteem to win a national title under those circumstances.
Surely you two can come up with more blogs celebrating a 3rd ranked team as the real NC of 83.
A team like auburn can't recover from the beat down Texas handed you at home and expect to finish higher than a Nebraska that lost by 1 point to the Nchampion in its bowl game. FACT.
Surely you two can come up with more blogs celebrating a 3rd ranked team as the real NC of 83.
A team like auburn can't recover from the beat down Texas handed you at home and expect to finish higher than a Nebraska that lost by 1 point to the Nchampion in its bowl game. FACT.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 4:20 pm to northalabamacracker
Go away cracker. You already showed your ignorance. No one respects your opinion.
Just get lost. Seriously.
Just get lost. Seriously.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 4:24 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
That's nice and all, but they were not awarded by either the AP or Coaches. It'd be the same thing as Bama's 1941 claim, if Au claimed this. Exact. Same. Thing.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 4:27 pm to northalabamacracker
quote:
A team like auburn can't recover from the beat down Texas handed you at home and expect to finish higher than a Nebraska that lost by 1 point to the Nchampion in its bowl game. FACT.
The team you'd rather be the national champion got their arse handed to them by Florida, who Auburn beat.
You guys are beating around the bush. The team with the best resume didn't get voted #1 by a poll put together by media members who got it wrong. Any computer model will have the 1983 Auburn schedule as one of the toughest schedules ever played, and anyone can see both Miami and Nebraska played fairly lackluster schedules.
Who was Nebraska's marquee win? Seriously. Penn State?
Page 19 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News